Sarah Palin is stupid. She would not have a chance of election in any first world nation apart from the United States of America (with the possible exception of Italy.) Her continuing prestige in the Republican Party is proof of the complete disconnection from reality of Republican voters.

Sarah Palin is stupid. She would not have a chance of election in any first world nation apart from the United States of America (with the possible exception of Italy.) Her continuing prestige in the Republican Party is proof of the complete disconnection from reality of Republican voters.

Mumbo, surely you must realize by now that there is a small group of dittoheads here that only post in the Political forum, and rarely if ever participate in Apple-related threads. Their only goal is to antagonize and post anti-Obama rubbish day after day. Don't take them seriously, they are just sore losers because the Supreme Court didn't appoint George Bush for a third term and that Republicans got roundly trounced in the last election. So, all they seem to be able to do is lash out and repeat the same garbage they hear from FOX, Rush, Lou Dobbs, et al.

You might also consider the ignore feature here in the forum to filter out the noise.

Disclaimer: my above comment was intended as a sarcastic remark, and was in no way intended to be a personal attack directed at Taskiss. Thank you.

This forum is called 'Political Outsider.' It is a place for people to discuss political issues.

In this forum, there is a thread with a nearly identical title to this one. That thread, with a nearly identical title, was begun for the sole purpose of mocking Barack Obama.

Taskiss agrees with the politics of the poster who began that thread, so he didn't criticise it. He criticises this, nearly identical, thread, because he does not agree with its politics. This thread is "a typical liberal attempt to discuss politics." That thread is not worthy of comment.

This forum is called 'Political Outsider.' It is a place for people to discuss political issues.

In this forum, there is a thread with a nearly identical title to this one. That thread, with a nearly identical title, was begun for the sole purpose of mocking Barack Obama.

Taskiss agrees with the politics of the poster who began that thread, so he didn't criticise it. He criticises this, nearly identical, thread, because he does not agree with its politics. This thread is "a typical liberal attempt to discuss politics." That thread is not worthy of comment.

That is hypocrisy.

You've merely revealed the true intent of this thread, which was to label anyone commenting on this one and not the other one as a hypocrite.

The lack of a comment in an internet political forum thread does not necessarily indicate support for or derision of anything. It does not necessarily indicate concession of "defeat" or inability to respond. It is all perception. And in this case, my perception is that your perception is not reality.

You've merely revealed the true intent of this thread, which was to label anyone commenting on this one and not the other one as a hypocrite.

The lack of a comment in an internet political forum thread does not necessarily indicate support for or derision of anything. It does not necessarily indicate concession of "defeat" or inability to respond. It is all perception. And in this case, my perception is that your perception is not reality.

Absolutely not.

I began this thread to mock sacred cows of the right, like Ron 'Economically Illiterate Dickhole' Paul, and Ayn 'Tubgirl' Rand, and Ronald 'Stupid Cunt' Reagan, and to be provocative. That is what this thread is for. It is identical to the other thread about Obama. That's why I gave it a nearly identical name.

If, however, Taskiss intends to criticise this thread for being "a typical liberal attempt to discuss politics" then perhaps he's not a hypocrite. But he should also, I must aver, get the fuck off his high horse unless he's going to criticise the other thread as "a typical conservative attempt to discuss politics."

I can't help but notice that you have no problem with the Obama cartoon thread, which consists of Trumptman posting cartoons and images about Barack Obama.

Hypocrite.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo

This forum is called 'Political Outsider.' It is a place for people to discuss political issues.

In this forum, there is a thread with a nearly identical title to this one. That thread, with a nearly identical title, was begun for the sole purpose of mocking Barack Obama.

Taskiss agrees with the politics of the poster who began that thread, so he didn't criticise it. He criticises this, nearly identical, thread, because he does not agree with its politics. This thread is "a typical liberal attempt to discuss politics." That thread is not worthy of comment.

That is hypocrisy.

Normally I'd give thoughtful rebuttal, but your crap doesn't deserve it. You have no idea what the you're talking about, and it's too damn bad that it doesn't stop you from posting. Go troll under another bridge.

You even replied to this post, my reply to trumptman:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taskiss

The man is your president. I can't believe you would dishonor him that way. Your acts are a reflection of your beliefs, and whether or not it was your intention, you've just given a glimpse of who you are, and I don't find it attractive. I consider what you have done as trolling.

And as for this kind of crap, and fools that post links to articles like it -

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taskiss

Do you really think of the president in the terms as expressed by the article?

Platonic philosopher-king?

The article is filled with partisan rhetoric to the point where it appears to be a parody. I would mourn for anyone who truly embraces it's intent.

I've never started crap, nor have I ever joined in with this kind of crap..but I'll call folks on it, when they deserve it like you do for this thread. I'll respectfully disagree, when respect is deserved. For you, it's not. This thread proves it. So, mumbo, epic FAIL.

I'd expect an apology, but someone that would start a thread like this has no integrity, so I'll not hold my breath.

Mumbo Jumbo is a noun and is the name of a grotesque idol said to have been worshipped by some tribes. In its figurative sense, Mumbo Jumbo is an object of senseless veneration or a meaningless ritual.

Modern Usage

The Independent used the term to describe the Royal Marriages Act in their coverage of the wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla.[3]

Normally I'd give thoughtful rebuttal, but your crap doesn't deserve it. You have no idea what the you're talking about, and it's too damn bad that it doesn't stop you from posting. Go troll under another bridge.

You even replied to this post, my reply to trumptman:And as for this kind of crap, and fools that post links to articles like it -I've never started crap, nor have I ever joined in with this kind of crap..but I'll call folks on it, when they deserve it like you do for this thread. I'll respectfully disagree, when respect is deserved. For you, it's not. This thread proves it. So, mumbo, epic FAIL.

I'd expect an apology, but someone that would start a thread like this has no integrity, so I'll not hold my breath.

Well, I'm sorry. Really.

This thread was never intended to have any integrity. It was intended as a comment on the very irritating Obama cartoon thread, which has absolutely no integrity of any kind.

Mumbo Jumbo is a noun and is the name of a grotesque idol said to have been worshipped by some tribes. In its figurative sense, Mumbo Jumbo is an object of senseless veneration or a meaningless ritual.

Modern Usage

The Independent used the term to describe the Royal Marriages Act in their coverage of the wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla.[3]

I began this thread to mock sacred cows of the right, like Ron 'Economically Illiterate Dickhole' Paul, and Ayn 'Tubgirl' Rand, and Ronald 'Stupid Cunt' Reagan, and to be provocative. That is what this thread is for. It is identical to the other thread about Obama. That's why I gave it a nearly identical name.

If, however, Taskiss intends to criticise this thread for being "a typical liberal attempt to discuss politics" then perhaps he's not a hypocrite. But he should also, I must aver, get the fuck off his high horse unless he's going to criticise the other thread as "a typical conservative attempt to discuss politics."

Say one more mean thing about right wing sacred cows and I'll take away all your internets. You have enraged me sir!

That's a pretty good one! It illustrates the point that some of the Republicans are starting to understand part of what they've been doing wrong. However right now it's kind of like stopping a run away train ( the nut faction is so loud and they've been allowed to get away with it for so long ).

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination

You're just writing random stuff. The facts are not as you see them. We are correct. You are incorrect. These town halls have been instituted so that a conversation can occur. The actions of the nutjobs who bring posters comparing their president to Hitler and believe that there will be government "death panels" and forced euthanasia are shouting to prevent this conversation.

That is the truth. You are defending paranoid, insane conspiracy theories.

Seems you're the one throwing the temper-tantrum, here. I state my opinion and I get a load of regurgitated buzz-word-talking-point-infested tripe in response.

The conservative movement is now irrelevant, right? So why isn't it?

If the liberal Democrats really are in the "clear majority" in this country and the only people who would dare oppose anything set forth by THE ONE are fringe nutcase conspiracy whack jobs, why all the scare tactics? Why this deliberate effort to try to silence them if they are truly thought of as irrelevant?

Frankly, the reaction of the Democrat establishment to people exercising their Constitutional rights would be hilarious if it wasn't so scary.

Seems you're the one throwing the temper-tantrum, here. I state my opinion and I get a load of regurgitated buzz-word-talking-point-infested tripe in response.

The conservative movement is now irrelevant, right? So why isn't it?

If the liberal Democrats really are in the "clear majority" in this country and the only people who would dare oppose anything set forth by THE ONE are fringe nutcase conspiracy whack jobs, why all the scare tactics? Why this deliberate effort to try to silence them if they are truly thought of as irrelevant?

Frankly, the reaction of the Democrat establishment to people exercising their Constitutional rights would be hilarious if it wasn't so scary.

Well, now. That's confusing.

Are you actually denying that people have been turning up at these town halls with posters comparing Obama to Hitler, and shouting that the reforms will lead to euthanasia, and that the president was born in Kenya, and actively attempting to prevent a reasonable debate?

Are you actually denying that people have been turning up at these town halls with posters comparing Obama to Hitler, and shouting that the reforms will lead to euthanasia, and that the president was born in Kenya, and actively attempting to prevent a reasonable debate?

Have these things occurred or not?

I don't believe I denied anything of the sort. If people show up saying the moon is really a giant ball of cheese that will soon plummet to earth and turn us into a giant quesadilla, that is their right guaranteed under the First Amendment, is it not?

I don't believe I denied anything of the sort. If people show up saying the moon is really a giant ball of cheese that will soon plummet to earth and turn us into a giant quesadilla, that is their right guaranteed under the First Amendment, is it not?

Thanks for the clearing that up.

So you agree that these things are happening. OK.

Am I right, then, that you believe that people turning up to a town hall debate where health care is to be discussed with posters comparing the president to Hitler and shouting that he was born in Kenya and that the reforms will lead to euthanasia and death panels are a perfectly legitimate use of their rights under the First Amendment?